Crunching the Costs: Which Sorbent Soaks Up Savings?
Vinesh k -
This week, I took another big step in understanding the economics of atmospheric water capture. Instead of just looking at raw data, I focused on extracting key numbers and building a cost model to see which sorbents might actually be worth using at scale.
To start, I learned how to extract data from charts using PlotDigitizer (link), a tool that lets you pull precise numerical values from published graphs. It was an interesting process—almost like reverse-engineering the data to make it usable for real-world calculations.
With the extracted data in hand, I built an Excel model to analyze cost-effectiveness. The idea was simple: take the cost of each sorbent and divide it by the amount of water it could release. Since all the values were from the same desorption temperature, I left out energy costs—those would remain constant across the board.
The results were telling. Out of the four beaded sorbents, activated alumina proved to be the most cost-effective at this scale and temperature. This insight is key because it highlights which materials might be worth prioritizing for future research and applications.
Next up, I’ll refine my model further and test different conditions to see how these rankings shift. Stay tuned as I continue breaking down the numbers and getting closer to answering the big question: Can atmospheric water capture be both effective and affordable?
Comments:
All viewpoints are welcome but profane, threatening, disrespectful, or harassing comments will not be tolerated and are subject to moderation up to, and including, full deletion.